How old is to old for safe modern freeway traffic.

How old is to old for safe modern freeway traffic.

On the topic of older 100% restored cars. At what era do we need to pull the plug on driving in modern traffic on the freeway.

So got offered a 55 T-Bird cheap and fully restored a few days ago, drove the car and its a toy in modern traffic. Unsafe at 55 in a way. Absolutely love the car though, thinking about pulling the trigger and putting it on the lift for storage for sunny days.

Where do you guys cut the line era wise on driving restored cars in traffic. I can drive across the country in a 67 Mustang, the T-Bird less so, but 63 corvette do issues. Am I just getting old are is there such a gap in construction in the 55-say-65 era that there is no getting around.

Modified cars I am less hung up on, I drove my 28 for a year whenever the weather was good and had no issues but it was not a factory car.

I think it depends in large part on what you consider modern freeway traffic is - and how you expect to drive it. My 1966 Caddy is fine in any driving conditions around here or in Vegas. My Mini is as well. But in both cases, you have to drive more conservatively and with more attention than your typical overpowered SUV. Know your car's abilities and drive to them, and acknowledge that you might have a few people cutting in front of you and that you'll get there a couple of minutes later.

If the T-bird was unsafe at 55 in 1955, then it will still be so. If it was safe at 55 when it was new, it can still be today.

A '55 T can't comfortable do 55?

What does it do or not do?

Interesting, I'd have thought a classic would be better suited to the freeway than urban streets. Once out of urban areas freeways tend to move at a relatively constant speed in a straightish line. Far fewer braking, turning and accelerating events than in the city. And let's face it, it's that speed up, slow down and turn corner bit that has improved out of all recognition over the last decades. I'd also imagine that it's safer on the freeway, aren't most accidents close to home on city streets. It's that brake right now avoid the SUV, child, dog, bike think and hit a parked car, lampost, semi that would be harder and more serious in an older car.

Or did I completely miss the plot here?

It was around 64-65 that US manufacturers started to dial out the unwanted geometry changes over suspension travel. Up to that point they just relied on the compliance of bias ply tires. My 63 Falcon had 7/8" of toe change from droop to full compression. In 64.5 they redesigned the steering linkage to reduce that drastically.

It was a real handful on the interstate with the soft factory springs, that much bump steer and modern radial tires.

All this stuff can be fixed though. I really like restored cars that have been improved in the right ways. A gearbox with an overdrive, improved brakes, bump steer corrections and good dampers go a long way towards making the cars more friendly.

Anything starting from the 40s and up as long as its got juice brakes.

What's wrong with the '55? Not enough power? Stability? Brakes? As far as performance goes, I think really most properly maintained older vehicles would be fine, as long as they have enough power to not be a moving roadblock. I guess that really limits you to probably the 30s and 40s on up. Old braking systems can be fine, again, as long as they've been maintained. Sure, it doesn't have the safety envelope of a new car, but that's why average people don't go driving around in really old cars. Know and respect their limitations, and I really don't see a there being a hard cutoff for when a car is too unsafe to drive on a public road...

I'm a huge proponent of old stuff in general though, so take that as you may.

My dad's 53 Mercury does okay in today's traffic, but isn't ideal. What I have found from working on it and driving it:

1. Brakes are adequate, but most new cars will easily out brake it. You have to leave more room in traffic and PAY ATTENTION while driving. Another thing is cars like his do not have self-adjusting brakes, so you have to adjust them every so often. I really appreciate self-adjusting drum brakes now.

2. Power is actually good enough. Hard to believe with 125 hp and 3700 lbs of weight. 4.10 rear gears help it out getting going and the overdrive gives it decent top speed. Your not going to out run many cars in it, but it will keep up good enough. Not sure I would like to go across country in it though.

3. Handling is what you would expect from a 60 year old design. Soft suspension with a whole lotta body roll. Extra slow steering ratio helps out, keeps you from doing things too quickly for the car.

So older cars can be driven in todays traffic, you just need to know their limitations. The main reason I probably wouldn't is the risk to the car, some cars would be nearly impossible to replace or repair correctly due to parts availability.

My dad's 66 Mustang 289 2 bbl automatic is definitely not fun to drive on the highway, but if you just plant it in the right lane at 60 mph it's acceptable. Definitely gets very jittery over bumps. Interestingly, for the longest time we thought the transmission was a 2 speed because we only ever felt it shift once. It does have a third gear which it shifts to at 60 mph. It's currently riding on whitewall Goodyear radials bought in the late 90's (intended for Grandpa's Lincoln, probably the last years the major manufacturers still made whitewalls).

He currently also has a '55 T-bird but he's selling it because though it's a fun car, much more fun than the mustang and has a beautiful exhaust note, we're both 6'4" and have trouble sitting in it for more than a few minutes, and have trouble getting in and out with that giant steering wheel.

Depends. Take a look at the braking performance of this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBSd2QvY7wQ

versus this

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0y2q1akO3lk

I'd say you have to feel that out for yourself. If you care about crash testing, then forget it for most old stuff.

In my experience, it's not the car that's unsafe, it's the idiot behind the wheel. I drive my Samurai in traffic all the time. It's probably as safe as a beer can as far as crumple zones. It literally backs up traffic because 0-60 is about 40 seconds and it will barely run 60. I stay off the interstate, and realize if I crash it there is a good chance I'll die. It doesn't bother me too much. If you like it, drive it and understand it's limitations.

It's a good question. When I was looking for my cruiser, I had two safety requirements: three-point belts and dual-circuit brakes. I know that both can be added but, hey, I'm a busy guy.

My '75 wagon has both and can easily cruise at 75 mph, although at that speed it does suck down some gas. A good alignment, fresh Konis and new tires also help it track nicely.

In reply to David S. Wallens:

Of note; I had a dual circuit master cylinder old car brake failure. It was still potentially catastrophic. It took 10-15 pumps to get anything out of the rear brakes and they skidded for like 100 feet at a crawling pace before I found some grass to slow down in.

I got passed by a restored model A and a couple pre war Studabakers this summer on their way to a car show in Fairbanks, but we really don't have true freeways here. I guess it depends on your driving habits and the roads around you as well as how faithfully you want to keep the car original.

I had a 56 Chev in about 77, and it was ok for cruising, but fragile, noisy and not a great handler. Then, I had a 66 Delta 88 in about 1980. As long as I didn't have stop too often, the 11 inch drum brakes worked just fine. It cruised the highways at 80 all day long at 16-17 mpg, it topped out at about 130, and was as stable as a rock. Whether it would still feel that way after driving modern cars is another question, but I think I'd feel comfortable highway driving anything from the mid 60's on from GM or Ford, maybe mid 70's Chrysler, European, and Japanese. For around town, I'd go much earlier on Euro, and a bit earlier on Japanese. I won't drive an un-modified 60's Mopar.

Fuel economy and road salt are the only reasons I don't drive stuff from the 60's/70's everyday. Yes I would want to make some comfort and handling mods, but I would do that to most any car. By 1965 (even the mid 50's in some cases) cars were pretty safe and stable at speed. Look at Joie Chitwood doing stunts in a new '58 Chevy. The biggest change I would make is a disc brake upgrade and tires. Each car will have it's own strength and weaknesses.

I drove my 50 Studebaker on NJ highways quite frequently. With the factory overdrive it could achieve 65mph and as long as I stuck in the slow lane it was fine.

Yes it takes a great deal more situational awareness to drive an older car but that doesn't mean the old cars are less safe, it means new cars have made drivers less safe but not requiring situational awareness at all times.

My cut off point is late 1980s for something to commute with and drive on freeway.

tuna55 wrote: Depends. Take a look at the braking performance of this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBSd2QvY7wQ versus this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBSd2QvY7wQ I'd say you have to feel that out for yourself. If you care about crash testing, then forget it for most old stuff.

Tuna, both links are the same... could you repost the other video you wanted to use?

I think it depends on what you mean by safe for freeway traffic. If it can't go the speed of traffic, that's dangerous. If it can, but will be more dangerous in a crash, that can be considered dangerous.

The oldest thing I own is from 1987. It seems to do fine, can go 75 easy (can peg the speedo, too ), stops good, handles reasonably well (for a van), but has no airbags. I found a test of a similar van:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DO5BAckbguU

It is going 35mph into a non-deformable barrier (basically a solid wall). It didn't collapse as badly as some other old cars, but I certainly wouldn't want to see the facial reconstruction bill after taking the steering wheel to the face.

I can go with traffic just fine on the interstate. I also wouldn't want to crash it. A new car might be better in an accident, but at 75 it's going to suck bad either way.

I don't drive my daughter anywhere in my van, even though my parents drove me in this van. was it irresponsible for them? Or not because there wasn't a better option?

Sliding scale, with the traffic, condition of roads, safety features, comfort, cost, and ability all taken into consideration. A 75 Mercedes is safe anywhere. A 91 Geo Metro? I'd worry about taking that out. Chicagoland? I'm being very careful with what I put my body in--on a weekday, it had better have 3 way seatbelts and my confidence that it won't implode on a collision. Central Illinois? I'd drive around here in a MGA without a seatbelt or helmet.

Rufldt has just shown me that Maud Flanders is real... And I am disturbed by it.

You're all a bunch of Bob Costas!

My 66 Caddy is great at 75 - comfortable with a great ride, but it feels like you're going fast. The brakes are good enough for the task at hand, you just have to leave yourself room. The 1967 Land Rover, on the other hand, was never a great street vehicle. It's slow on hills, is happiest running at 55 mph max (although I've spent some time at 65 in it) and doesn't have a lot of braking.

drdisque wrote: My dad's 66 Mustang 289 2 bbl automatic is definitely not fun to drive on the highway, but if you just plant it in the right lane at 60 mph it's acceptable. Definitely gets very jittery over bumps. Interestingly, for the longest time we thought the transmission was a 2 speed because we only ever felt it shift once. It does have a third gear which it shifts to at 60 mph. It's currently riding on whitewall Goodyear radials bought in the late 90's (intended for Grandpa's Lincoln, probably the last years the major manufacturers still made whitewalls). He currently also has a '55 T-bird but he's selling it because though it's a fun car, much more fun than the mustang and has a beautiful exhaust note, we're both 6'4" and have trouble sitting in it for more than a few minutes, and have trouble getting in and out with that giant steering wheel.

My 65 Mustang was stock when I bought it and was scary at anything over 55mph. All it took was to drop the upper control arm to correct the camber curve and install radials and it improved immensely. After installing a more performance oriented suspension and front disc brakes, it now is very stable at illegal speeds.

I asked this question with a different slant to it on the classic motorsports forum. I didn't think much of most of the answers.

Personally, I don't enjoy driving my classic in "modern traffic." This means that it only comes out on evenings and weekends.

It also means that I am planning modifications to make it more suitable for "modern traffic" so I can drive it more (3-point belts, improved brakes, headrests, etc.).